Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 752 F.3d 1109 - Walton v. Dawson

Walton v. Dawson’s Empirical Analysis

752 F.3d 1109 · 2014

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Estelle v. Gamble · Mitchell v. Forsyth

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) the facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, demonstrate the deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “we [do] have jurisdiction to decide, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to [the] plaintiff[ ], whether a reasonable fact-finder could find a violation of plaintiff[’s] rights, whether the law establishing the violation was clearly established at the time in question, what was known to a person who might be shielded by qualified immunity, and the reasonableness of defendants'] actions.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Faced with an interlocutory appeal from the denial of qualified immunity, we accept as true the district court's findings of fact to the extent they are not 'blatantly contradicted by the record,' and review the district court's conclusions of law de novo.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.